GTG 1882S Morgan

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by Pickin and Grinin, Nov 24, 2020.


What is the grade on the slab

  1. AU58

    0 vote(s)
  2. MS60

    0 vote(s)
  3. MS61

  4. MS63

  5. MS64

  6. MS65

  7. MS62

  1. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    I went with 64's one of those toss-up 63/64 (not clean enough for a 65 but nowhere near as many hits as you'd expect on a 62)
    Pickin and Grinin and Lehigh96 like this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. Steve Shupe

    Steve Shupe Member

    looks 63 to me.
    Pickin and Grinin likes this.
  4. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    I had hoped that everyone that saw my missed 62 in the poll, at least graded it as such when they typed their answer.
    Before heading to work, I noticed the missing grade and made the change.

    Any one want to change their grade.? If you do you are gonna have to post it. I think I unclicked the change your vote option.
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2020
  5. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    Will do, thanks for the heads up.
  6. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    Interesting, I noticed that there were quite a few voters that I have never seen before.
    I just wanted to say welcome to CT, and thanks for playing.

    @Idoono @Raulhg @Dennis Drown @Jeff Ballus @schnickelfritz48
    And must be a young'in in the mist. @AmishJedi

    Photos can sometimes make this game challenging. As some photos can hide blemishes and some can over exaggerate the contact.
    You get to make the call.
  7. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    I will give this till morning as I hope that @jtlee321 sees it.
    By the way, I took the 45 minute travel across town today to get another Jansjo light to replace the one that broke. The Jansjo model that I use is not in production anymore, and available only on amazon. I found some smaller problem is that they use a usb port instead of a plug. The color and amount of light that they put off is very close to the filters I already use. I will see if I can put one more light to the coin. Seems like more of a hassle.
    jtlee321 likes this.
  8. chascat

    chascat Well-Known Member

    I've changed my vote on this one, I was at 64 but bump it to 64+ or better.
  9. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

  10. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    Yeah, I can't create the same tones of light for it to work with my set up.
    @jgrinz I am leaning towards a vam34 just because of the look on the date, I still can't find any confirming die markers.
  11. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    Playing with the camera tonight. I took a few more photos. A little more in detail.
    This is a die marker that I can't find any where.
    This has a couple that are part of other VAM's.
    The Neck/wing.
    The MM and die scratches coming from wing tip 2.
    upload_2020-11-24_21-39-2.png upload_2020-11-24_21-39-21.png
    A couple of the cheek and the Eagles breast.
    upload_2020-11-24_21-42-34.png upload_2020-11-24_21-42-54.png
    And another of the IGWT
    capthank likes this.
  12. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    Doggonit I forgot the date.
    jtlee321 likes this.
  13. jtlee321

    jtlee321 Well-Known Member

    I just got home from house sitting for the last couple of days. The internet there is horrible and I was stuck with just my phone. I saw my summons and am answering. LOL

    I voted MS-64. The luster looks incredible, which it should as it's one of the early S mints. It appears to be semi PL with really reflective fields. There are marks, but nothing to make it grade at the MS-62 level. I see it as a 63A / 64C.
    Pickin and Grinin and Lehigh96 like this.
  14. GoldFinger1969

    GoldFinger1969 Well-Known Member

    Who is "they" and are you saying that on less-commons or CC's they are more forgiving ?

    Is this your opinion or have they de facto said that ?

    Ironically, I'm looking at 1882-S's right now......:D
    jtlee321 likes this.
  15. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    They = TPGs
    ddddd, furham, jtlee321 and 1 other person like this.
  16. jtlee321

    jtlee321 Well-Known Member

    He's referring to the TPG's. The 1879-S - 1882-S typically come really nice, well struck with outstanding luster. So when a grader see's one in the grading room, it needs to be a bit better than most to make the same grade. Only because they are so commonly nice looking. The scale tends to flip in the opposite way when it comes to the common CC Morgans. While the '82-CC, '83-CC and '84-CC are relatively common, they tend to be very baggy, so cleaner one's tend to get a grade bump, just for being a CC. Compare a few MS-65 1882-CC and 1882-S Morgans and you will see what we are talking about.
  17. Anthony Mazza

    Anthony Mazza Active Member

  18. buckeye73

    buckeye73 Well-Known Member

  19. Dave Waterstraat

    Dave Waterstraat dave700x -1883 O nut

    I voted MS64 but being a pre-finger holder slab the label could be MS63.
    Pickin and Grinin likes this.
  20. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    @Dave Waterstraat you have any opinion on the VAM?
    I am leaning to an earlier die state of 34.
  21. Dave Waterstraat

    Dave Waterstraat dave700x -1883 O nut

    1882-S is a tough nut to crack especially from images. I try to start with the mint mark looking at the location and for any signs of S/S then move on to the date looking for doubling. Yours does not appear to be an S/S variety and the ejection damage on the date makes it impossible to identify any date doubling in the die.
    VAM-34 would be a no for me based on the MM location. You have a centered and upright MM in my opinion. Maybe @messydesk could help out. '82-S is definitely not in my VAM wheelhouse....
    Pickin and Grinin likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page